止觀輔行傳弘決 7.9

7.9

次「或言」下，料簡正助，釋大經疑。前引大經乃云無量阿僧祇助菩提法是大涅槃因，及五味中有正有助，今文何故復以為正？故引兩文或正或助，隨其深淺皆以前前助於後後。教文意兼，故皆云似，故今文意須有正助。此文即正，助道即助，是故引教兩文俱存。前五味中具引諸經，故並有正助。「文若言」下，料簡有漏無漏者，由前五味中云「有漏道品欲界二十二」等，初文徵難，準《婆沙》文。七覺既是修道之位，何得總判道品有漏？故引《法華》證成無漏。「云何」下，又難。《婆沙》七覺既是修道之位，當知八正在七覺前，即是見道。依此問之，何故八正在七覺前？「此應」下，答也。由前二文相違不定，故須開為三句解釋。先列三句，「如大論」下解釋。先略釋有漏，「云何」下釋三十七品是有漏相，「皆是」下釋三十七品皆是無漏。「從來」下重更印許前引《大論》之文。「而婆沙」去，釋第三義。「何以故」下釋《婆沙》文。若八正在七覺後，八正已前雖是有漏，若至八正入無漏故，故此道品亦漏無漏。若言八正在七覺前是無漏者，如常所說，經論皆爾，故云「可解」，即屬第二意。又《婆沙》五十三云「四念處有二種，謂有漏、無漏，乃至八正亦復如是。」是則始終俱屬第三。又《雜含》第六云「七覺八正一一皆有漏及無漏。」是則《婆沙》及以《雜含》具有三義，俱屬第三。今文但列初義證成。引《婆沙》證成二意者，亦漏無漏及以無漏，及亦漏無漏是對位者，重以對位釋前八正在七覺前，世第一前是亦有漏，見道已去是亦無漏，是則八正在七覺前具於二義，謂第二、第三。

Next, from “or saying” downward, he distinguishes principal and auxiliary [practices] and resolves a doubt concerning the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra*. The earlier quotation from the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra* stated that immeasurable asamkhyeyas of auxiliary factors for awakening are the causes of great nirvāṇa, and among the five flavors there are also principal and auxiliary [factors]; why, then, does the present text treat them again as principal? Therefore, quoting two passages where they are either principal or auxiliary, according to their depth the earlier in each case assists the later. Because the scriptural intention encompasses both, both are called "resemblances"; thus the intention of the present text requires that there be both principal and auxiliary. The present passage is the principal, while the auxiliary path is the auxiliary; therefore, when scriptures are cited, both passages are preserved. In the preceding [discussion of] the five flavors, various sūtras were cited fully, so both principal and auxiliary are present.

From “If the text says” downward, he distinguishes the defiled (sāsrava) and the undefiled (anāsrava). Because the earlier section on the five flavors stated that “the defiled aids to the path consist of twenty-two in the desire realm,” etc., the first passage raises a challenge based on the text of the *Mahāvibhāṣā*. Since the seven factors of awakening belong to the stage of the path of cultivation (bhāvanā-mārga), how can one classify the aids to the path as entirely defiled? Therefore, he cites the *Lotus Sūtra* to substantiate that they are undefiled. From “How could” downward, he challenges further: since according to the *Mahāvibhāṣā* the seven factors of awakening belong to the stage of the path of cultivation, one should know that the eightfold noble [path], being before the seven factors of awakening, must be the path of seeing (darśana-mārga). Asking on this basis: why is the eightfold noble [path] placed before the seven factors of awakening? From “This should” downward is the answer. Because the two earlier passages contradict each other and are indeterminate, one must resolve the explanation into three propositions. First, he lists the three propositions; from “As the *Dazhidulun* says” downward is the explanation. First, he briefly explains the defiled; from “How so” downward, he explains the characteristics of the thirty-seven aids being defiled; from “all are” downward, he explains that the thirty-seven aids are all undefiled. From “Hitherto” downward, he reaffirms and approves the text of the *Dazhidulun* cited previously. From “Yet the *Mahāvibhāṣā*” onward, he explains the third meaning. From “Why is this?” downward, he explains the text of the *Mahāvibhāṣā*. If the eightfold noble [path] comes after the seven factors of awakening, then although what precedes the eightfold noble [path] is defiled, upon reaching the eightfold noble [path] one enters the undefiled; hence these aids to the path are both defiled and undefiled. If one says that the eightfold noble [path] coming before the seven factors of awakening is undefiled, this is as commonly stated and is true across sūtras and treatises; hence it is said to be “readily understood,” which belongs to the second meaning. Furthermore, fascicle 53 of the *Mahāvibhāṣā* says: “The four stations of mindfulness are of two kinds, namely defiled and undefiled, and so on up to the eightfold noble [path], which is also like this.” In that case, from beginning to end all belong to the third [proposition]. Furthermore, fascicle six of the *Saṃyuktāgama* says: “Each of the seven factors of awakening and the eightfold noble [path] is defiled as well as undefiled.” In that case, both the *Mahāvibhāṣā* and the *Saṃyuktāgama* possess all three meanings, and all belong to the third [proposition]. The present text merely sets forth the first meaning as proof. Citing the *Mahāvibhāṣā* to substantiate the two meanings—both defiled and undefiled, as well as undefiled—and matching them to stages: he again uses the correlation with stages to explain why the eightfold noble [path] is earlier placed before the seven factors of awakening. Prior to the stage of the supreme worldly dharmas (laukikāgradharma), it is also defiled; from the path of seeing onward, it is also undefiled. Thus, placing the eightfold noble [path] before the seven factors of awakening possesses both meanings, namely the second and the third.